Bully Wiki:Community Noticeboard/Archive 2
Banned Users, their blogs, and their talk page use I just need opinions. When a user is blocked for good, should their blog posts be deleted? Dan the Man 1983 18:09, August 21, 2010 (UTC) :I'd say usually it should but administrators may decline to delete it at their discretion. McJeff (talk this way)/ 20:55, September 1, 2010 (UTC) ::Yes, I think it should, since no one but admins can really edit it. Jenny Vincent♣ 21:04, September 1, 2010 (UTC) :::I agree with deleting them, but if it was an argument or dispute in a blog that cause them to be blocked, I say leave that blog post on the wiki as proof, so to speak. :::Which brings me to another point, which me and Jeff seem to differ in our views on. When a user is blocked for good, should we let them keep their ability to edit and use their talk page, or should we take it away? Dan the Man 1983 03:03, September 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::Yeah, proof's good. And don't let them keep it, because then there'll be a LOT of complaining and insults since they'll have a "I can't get banned anymore!" additude. Jenny Vincent♣ 03:08, September 2, 2010 (UTC) :::That's exactly the reason why I don't let them have the ability to use their talk page once they're blocked for good. Incase they insult, or disrupt their talk page with spam. What else do they have to lose? They're blocked already. If they want to say sorry, well they should have thought of the consequences of their actions before being blocked. Dan the Man 1983 03:15, September 2, 2010 (UTC) :::::Ok, I'm not no Admin but I'll give you my opinion, I mean I don't think we should delete everything you got to give them a chance for example: karensarahrocks's blog is still there but should we delete it? I think it shouldn't be deleted and we should let them edit their own talk page, as long as they don't screw up, If they spam once again no more blog or talk page for them. So if they keep editing their talk page and prove they won't do anything bad then you can unblock them, but they should only get one chance so you'll know if they change. TheAgeofRockstar 16:50, September 6, 2010 (UTC) ::::::If we need proof, then I think it should be posted on the user page or the talk page. Blogs should be deleted, and if they have proof then someone should be sure to add the proof to either the talk page or user page. Jenny Vincent♣ 18:38, September 9, 2010 (UTC) ::::: Images In the past week, well ever since the achievements feature was added to the wiki, there has been a whole lot of images uploaded to the wiki. So many, that some of them may have violated copyright. So Jeff has suggested that some guidelines need to made for image uploading, and I agree with him. So does any one have opinions on images, their size, and how many should be limited to each page. Size - I think images should at least be large enough in size to be enjoyable. I think that images that are smaller than 250px in width at full size should not be added. Kateharrington 06:20, September 1, 2010 (UTC) McJeff's Opinions: I'm more concerned with making sure we know where the images are being found than limiting the size of them. As you see when I upload an image, for example File:Lawnmowing_park.jpg, I say what website I found it on, where the picture's original location was, and that the rights remain with Rockstar Games and Take Two Interactive. So... if you're finding pictures off the Bully website, you should say that, and if you're uploading your own fan art, you should say that... obviously if it's yours, you can do whatever you want with it. I would however like to propose a flat ban on uploading other people's fan art. If they want it displayed on Bully Wiki, they can upload it themselves, and if you think it's that awesome you can go to their deviantart account or whatever and ask permission. McJeff (talk this way)/ 20:54, September 1, 2010 (UTC) Dan's Opinions: I second what Kate says about size limit. There has been uploaded images, where it looked like someone typed in google search, and uploaded the smaller version of images. No one can hardly see them. I also agree with Jeff's idea of a flat ban, plus I definately agree with his comments on making sure the when we upload images, we state what website where they came from. In fact it is Wikia's own policy to do that. But also I think we should limit the number of images an article has. Any more then three images on an article, should not be allowed in my opinion. Dan the Man 1983 02:22, September 2, 2010 (UTC) :IMO, not including the character portraits, one image per character article, one or two per mission article depending on how long the mission is, and for articles like the location pages, as many as is informative. McJeff (talk this way)/ 05:52, September 3, 2010 (UTC) ::I think character portraits should be allowed one image other than the yearbook picture for students and school authority. All other adults should only be allowed one. And main characters (Jimmy, Gary, and Petey) should have 3 including the yearbook picture. Kateharrington 07:17, September 3, 2010 (UTC) :::When it comes to the number of images per page. I think 2 on a characters page, and 3 on a mission page is fair enough. Dan the Man 1983 07:53, September 18, 2010 (UTC) Character Infoboxes I was wondering, why don't we have character infoboxes? On the character pages, it could include the character's picture, clique, clique stats, that sort of thing. What's everyone else's opinions? Jenny Vincent♣ 18:38, September 9, 2010 (UTC) :Good idea. Dan the Man 1983 19:03, September 9, 2010 (UTC) ::Thanks. So, if we should make some, how do you create a template? Jenny Vincent♣ 19:47, September 9, 2010 (UTC) :::Knowing a crapton of programming code. :::The infoboxes we have for the missions were imported from Grand Theft Auto Wiki by a guy named A-Dust. I edited it to format it better for Bully style missions. However, I can't program well enough to write my own infobox. Ages ago I tried to make infoboxes for Dan over at Boxing Wiki and couldn't do it. :::I'll see if there's something I can do. McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:05, September 11, 2010 (UTC) ::::OK, I'm importing the character box from GTA Wiki, but it's going to require a lot of editing to make it relevant to Bully. Please give me some time to mess around with it. McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:06, September 11, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Alright, thanks! Jenny Vincent♣ 00:10, September 11, 2010 (UTC) OK, here's what's happened so far. When I imported the infobox I realized I don't think there's enough information to make having a character infobox worthwhile. We could put only a few things in it, since we don't know things like nationality and birthdate and that stuff. *Character name *Picture *Clique *Voice Actor Also, I tried something else but it isn't working right. I made this page - Template:TowniesNav. In theory, it goes at the bottom of every Townie article. Then I would go and do a different one for the other cliques, using an appropriate color scheme (green and yellow for the nerds, royal blue and powder blue for the preps, etc). Problem is, it's supposed to collapse so you don't have to read the whole thing the entire time. And my version doesn't. Which means I'll have to go to community central and ask someone to fix it. But before I bother with that, do you guys like them enough that you'd like me to make one for the other groups? Or just delete that one and forget about it? McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:38, September 11, 2010 (UTC) ::I like the clique one! We could simply put it on the Townies page, and the other cliques on their pages. Adding on to the character infoboxes, we could put clique stats (Leader, 2nd in command, regular member.) But, you are right, there's not many things to put there. Jenny Vincent♣ 00:41, September 11, 2010 (UTC) :::Yeah, I like the clique navigation box too. :::But there is going to be a problem with these. We only know the second in commands for the Jocks, Preps and Townies. Me and Jeff disagree on who the second in command is for the Greasers, and we don't even know if the Nerds have one. We know the Bullies don't. :::Jeff, if you get stuck, your best bet is requesting help from one of the Wiki Helpers. Dan the Man 1983 15:08, September 11, 2010 (UTC) ::::The whole second in commands thing isn't a big deal, I can change that field. I replaced it with "lieutenants" for the Greasers, took it out for the Bullies and Nerds, and replaced the fields with Girls, Little Kids and Others for non-clique. ::::I can't be assed asking wiki helpers for help, too much work. McJeff (talk this way)/ 06:53, September 17, 2010 (UTC) :::::*Template:NonCliqueNav :::::*Template:NerdsNav :::::*Template:BulliesNav :::::*Template:PreppiesNav :::::*Template:GreasersNav :::::*Template:JocksNav :::::*Template:TowniesNav :::::McJeff (talk this way)/ 05:35, September 25, 2010 (UTC) Wow, those turned out very well! Sorry I couldn't help, but I'd screw it all down the drain. I'll start adding them to the articles, then. Jenny Vincent♣ 06:00, September 25, 2010 (UTC) ::I'll finish up tommorow if someone else hasn't. Jenny Vincent♣ 06:26, September 25, 2010 (UTC) Trivia Sections To keep or not to keep? Rather then make a bureaucratic decision to just delete them, lets see what other users think. I am in two minds about them. I can see why Jeff wants rid of them, bunk trivia is useless and can be annoying to clean up. Also IP's keep adding stupid useless information to them. But at as the same time, the sections do have some notable trivia that cannot be added elsewhere in an article. If we keep them we should really try and decide what is notable enough to be added to trivia sections and what is considered bunk. What do you guys think? Dan the Man 1983 00:01, January 30, 2011 (UTC) :I think we should keep them. A lot of the trivia for missions at least can be really helpful. The only solution I can think of is creating a page with every single trivia on it, divided by characters and missions, and protect it for registered contributors only. But that would be a big hassle. Of course, it's the best idea I've got. [[User:JennyVincent|'Jenny']] ♣(Talk to me!) 01:28, January 30, 2011 (UTC) ::I'm in favor of keeping them. I just got frustrated off for a few seconds. Most of the drama that happens here starts when someone adds a piece of bunk trivia and gets pissy when someone else reverts it. It'd be nice if there was some way to make a rule about what makes a trivia point valid and what doesn't, but... so far I think my efforts of working most of the trivia points into the articles proper is going pretty well, and there are a few articles which need trivia sections. McJeff (talk this way)/ 03:24, January 30, 2011 (UTC) :::"I just got frustrated off for a few seconds" - I kind of guessed that was the case hehe. :::I don't think there is any clear way of determining what is bunk and what is not. Trivia is trivia. What may seem to be a useless bunk edit to one person could actually be deemed useful and good information to another. If thats the case, then be BOLD and add it back in. Dan the Man 1983 10:41, January 30, 2011 (UTC) ::::I'm in favour of keeping 'em too—but if they're ever going to be effective it seems like there needs to be some sort of consensus on what exactly comprises trivia. I suppose any details which don't fit neatly into a character's characteristics or role in story would be just that; looking at Jimmy's page, for example, there's a note about his name coming from the Hebrew for 'one who supplants', which was likely done on purpose by Rockstar since they seem to like giving their characters meaningful names. While it's not stated fact that Rockstar chose it for that reason, nor does it impact upon him much in terms of the story (thus rendering it perhaps not important enough to go in his characteristics), I think it's interesting enough to keep on his page. ::Personally, I don't pay a whole lot of attention to the trivia sections myself if the facts listed aren't really relevant to in-game matters (mentioning that Christy shares a name with an athlete, for example, might be true but there is no connection between them and it's not referenced in the game). I can see more reasons in favour of keeping trivia than I can in favour of ditching it, but at the same time I wouldn't be distraught if it were to be removed. It would, however, be a shame to lose pertinent or interesting information simply because it doesn't fit neatly into the article. The only alternative I can think of is to create a central index of trivia on its own page and have each character's article link to the relevant section on it; this might, however, be more hassle than it's worth. omgneroli! 14:04, January 30, 2011 (UTC) :::Well, I see two solutions for this. One is to go with what Jenny said, but as she stated, it's probably too much of a hassle. But the best option I've got is to simply keep an eye out for trivia edits (maybe even have a section for admins created solely to keep track of trivia edits, if that's even possible). :::I never add trivia unless I can guarantee it's genuine (and not just merely opinion based). Like for example, a couple of trivia parts I've edited mentioned how Bif Taylor's boss fight music is different than normal boxing matches, and how Algie laughs in the background when you beat Fatty's ConSumo score. :::At the end of the day, I didn't really contribute anything that wasn't already mentioned in this part of the noticeboard, but those are my thoughts anyhow. :-P Hua Xiong 16:04, January 30, 2011 (UTC) : Wiki URL Change I am starting a community Vote for the change of Bully Wiki's url from www.bullygame.wikia.com to www.bully.wikia.com, because there is no need to have "game" in the url. All major gaming wikis such as killzone, fallout, gta and more don't have game in their url. Just the wiki's or the game's name, killzone.wikia.com, fallout.wikia.com, gta.wikia.com. Please let the voting start as of March 7th, 2011.Mr.Wikia 14:52, March 7, 2011 (UTC) :Done --Uberfuzzy 11:09, March 15, 2011 (UTC) Votes *'Yes' - The URL bully.wiki.com redirects here anyways. We might aswell make it our offical URL. Dan the Man 1983 :Ya MaisterMaster 16:51, March 7, 2011 (UTC) strike sockpuppeteer vote McJeff (talk this way)/ :Yes - Coolioman92 21:50, March 7, 2011 (UTC) strike sockpuppeteer vote McJeff (talk this way)/ *'Yes' - Mr.Wikia 23:27, March 7, 2011 (UTC) *'Yes' - see below for my comments. McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:17, March 9, 2011 (UTC) *'Yes '- To be honest, when I first searched this place, I just typed in 'bully.wikia.com'. [[User:JennyVincent|'☯Jenny☯']] ♣(♫♪♫♪) 01:24, March 9, 2011 (UTC) Comments hmmm, I think we can let "game" skip by as i is not needed. bully.wikia.com is good enough.MaisterMaster 15:38, March 7, 2011 (UTC) :Why should we change the URL? The URL always has been bullygame.wikia.com. Just because other game wiki does not have game in their URL does not mean we have to remove game from this wiki's URL. Dan the Man 1983 15:40, March 7, 2011 (UTC) ::I agree with Dan The Man 1983 with on thing that we don't have to change because othere wikias, but at the same time i think it's pretty obvious it's a game and has the gaming footer, so there is no need to add game. peace outIamsofakingcool. 17:14, March 7, 2011 (UTC) :::There is a need for game in the URL, because there is a movie called "Bully". I swear if I see anymore stupid reasons to change the URL, I will close this topic off and VETO the yes decisions. Dan the Man 1983 17:30, March 7, 2011 (UTC) I've asked on Angela's page on Community Central if such a relocation is even possible. If it isn't of course this vote is useless. McJeff (talk this way)/ 20:33, March 7, 2011 (UTC) :She says it is possible. McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:08, March 9, 2011 (UTC) :I've changed my mind and voted yes, because we might aswell make use of the bully.wikia.com which if you put in the address bar redirects here anyways. If people do make a bully movie wiki, well they can just put in Bully Movie in the URL. On a complete other note altogether, I tried signing this comment, but for some reason when I do, the page goes blank. Dan the Man 1983 01:41, March 9, 2011 (UTC) ::Looks like no one else is going to vote in this, so voting closed. We will request URL move. Dan the Man 1983 17:36, March 10, 2011 (UTC) Voting rationale This is a fairly long comment so I'm making a discussion section for it. The primary arguments against moving it are 1) "we don't need to", and 2) that there's a movie called Bully that could potentially in the future have its own wiki. Since we don't have "disambiguation wikis" and Bully Wiki has been around for almost 4 years, I don't see any major reasons to worry about being nice/fair to a wiki that doesn't actually exist. And, as noted, bully.wikia.com already redirects to us, so we really already own it - we just aren't using it. As far as "we don't need to move it", I spent several months cleaning up damage Mizu101 did to the wiki nominating things for deletion because "we don't need them" and "there's no reason for them". Using "we don't need" as a reason to do anything should really be sharply discouraged, and I say this with a bit of mea culpa having deleted a few articles wholesale with that as a justification. McJeff (talk this way)/ 00:22, March 9, 2011 (UTC) :This vote is a forgone conclusion now. I say we close voting now and just request it. Dan the Man 1983 01:35, March 9, 2011 (UTC) :Dan is correct, lets close the voting and request it now. :another thing I want to say, which is about number 2, that the movie Bully was made back in 2001, and if there was a wiki about it, it would have been made a couple of years ago, but then again anyone can start a wiki about anytime, so they can add movie in the url.Mr.Wikia 14:44, March 9, 2011 (UTC) Sockpuppetry I received a Checkuser result two days ago confirming that MaisterMaster and Iamsofakingcoo/Coolioman were "probably" the same account. After they/he declined to respond on their talk pages, I have decided to block him, MaisterMaster being the "main" account since apparently it's been registered for some time and the others were registered within this week. McJeff (talk this way)/ 23:28, March 10, 2011 (UTC)